FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2149270669> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2149270669 endingPage "4917" @default.
• W2149270669 startingPage "4911" @default.
• W2149270669 abstract "The mechanism underlying the synergism between transcription factors in eukaryotic gene expression is not fully understood. In minichromosomes assembled in vitro the synergism between steroid hormone receptors (SHRs) and nuclear factor 1 (NF1) on the mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV) promoter does not require the proline-rich transactivation domain (PRD) of NF1. Here we show that similar results are obtained in yeast. In contrast, replacing the native hormone-responsive elements (HREs) by a single HRE results in a more accessible chromatin and makes the synergism with SHR dependent on the PRD of NF1. Following hormone induction, in addition to glucocorticoid receptor, the DNA binding domain of NF1 is needed and sufficient for establishing an open chromatin conformation on the wild type MMTV promoter. Thus, NF1 acts as a classical transcription factor in a relaxed chromatin context, whereas in the context of the wild type chromatin DNA binding of NF1 is sufficient to cooperate with SHRs by stabilizing an open chromatin conformation. The mechanism underlying the synergism between transcription factors in eukaryotic gene expression is not fully understood. In minichromosomes assembled in vitro the synergism between steroid hormone receptors (SHRs) and nuclear factor 1 (NF1) on the mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV) promoter does not require the proline-rich transactivation domain (PRD) of NF1. Here we show that similar results are obtained in yeast. In contrast, replacing the native hormone-responsive elements (HREs) by a single HRE results in a more accessible chromatin and makes the synergism with SHR dependent on the PRD of NF1. Following hormone induction, in addition to glucocorticoid receptor, the DNA binding domain of NF1 is needed and sufficient for establishing an open chromatin conformation on the wild type MMTV promoter. Thus, NF1 acts as a classical transcription factor in a relaxed chromatin context, whereas in the context of the wild type chromatin DNA binding of NF1 is sufficient to cooperate with SHRs by stabilizing an open chromatin conformation. Regulation of eukaryotic gene transcription is achieved by combinatorial and synergistic interactions among transcription factors and co-regulators on promoter and/or enhancer regions. Several mechanisms have been claimed to mediate the functional synergism between transcription factors, including cooperative DNA binding, direct interaction between factors, simultaneous interactions with components of the general transcriptional machine or with common co-activators, as well as chromatin-mediated processes. Among the latter there are two main classes of enzymatic mechanisms, ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling (1Peterson C.L. Tamkun J.W. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1995; 20: 143-146Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (343) Google Scholar, 2Cairns B.R. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1998; 23: 20-25Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (152) Google Scholar, 3Kadonaga J.T. Cell. 1998; 92: 307-313Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (471) Google Scholar) and histone modifications (4Imhof A. Wolffe A.P. Curr. Biol. 1998; 8: R422-R424Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 5Grunstein M. Nature. 1997; 389: 349-352Crossref PubMed Scopus (2419) Google Scholar). To analyze the contribution of these different mechanisms in a natural sequence context, we have chosen to study the mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV) 1The abbreviations used are:MMTVmouse mammary tumor virusSHRsteroid hormone receptorNF1nuclear factor 1PRDproline-rich transactivation domainDBDDNA binding domainHREhormone-responsive elementsDHSDNase I hypersensitive siteHRhormone receptorGRglucocorticoid receptorDACdeacylcortivazolGEMSAgel electrophoretic mobility shift assay promoter as an example of a promoter induced by steroid hormones (for review, see Ref.6Beato M. Truss M. Chavez S. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1996; 784: 93-123Crossref PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar). The MMTV promoter is organized into positioned nucleosomes and silent in the absence of hormones, while it is rapidly activated in response to glucocorticoids or progestins (7Hager G.L. Archer T.K. Fragoso G. Bresnick E.H. Tsukagoshi Y. John S. Smith C.L. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 1993; 58: 63-71Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar, 8Truss M. Bartsch J. Schelbert A. Haché R.J.G. Beato M. EMBO J. 1995; 14: 1737-1751Crossref PubMed Scopus (265) Google Scholar). The promoter encompasses a composite regulatory unit of 148 bp containing five partly degenerated hormone-responsive elements (HREs) upstream of a binding site for nuclear factor 1 (NF1) and two octamer motifs. The HREs are recognized by the receptors for glucocorticoids or progestins, which are ligand-activated transcription factors. The hormone receptors (HRs) interact with the major groove of DNA as homodimers contacting a narrow sector of the double helix (9Scheidereit C. Beato M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1984; 81: 3029-3033Crossref PubMed Scopus (156) Google Scholar). NF1 represents a ubiquitous family of transcription factors encoded by at least four different genes, which give rise to several variants due to alternative splicing (10Kruse U. Sippel A.E. J. Mol. Biol. 1994; 238: 860-865Crossref PubMed Scopus (77) Google Scholar). All variants share a conserved N-terminal DNA binding domain (DBD) and bind as dimers to palindromic sites, completely surrounding the DNA double helix (11Eisfeld K. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25: 3733-3742Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar). The variants differ in their C-terminal moiety, which has been shown to carry proline-rich transactivation domains (PRDs) (12Kim T.K. Roeder R.G. J. Biol. Chem. 1993; 268: 20866-20869Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 13Mermod N. O'Neill E.A. Kelly T.J. Tjian R. Cell. 1989; 58: 741-753Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (542) Google Scholar). mouse mammary tumor virus steroid hormone receptor nuclear factor 1 proline-rich transactivation domain DNA binding domain hormone-responsive elements DNase I hypersensitive site hormone receptor glucocorticoid receptor deacylcortivazol gel electrophoretic mobility shift assay Prior to hormone induction and due to a positioned nucleosome located over the regulatory unit, the NF1 site is not accessible on MMTV chromatin, and only two of the five HREs can be bound by HRs (11Eisfeld K. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25: 3733-3742Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar, 14Piña B. Brüggemeier U. Beato M. Cell. 1990; 60: 719-731Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (335) Google Scholar). Hormone induction in vivo leads to chromatin remodeling over the regulatory unit manifested by a DNase I hypersensitive site (DHS) (15Cordingley M.G. Riegel A.T. Hager G.L. Cell. 1987; 48: 261-270Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (313) Google Scholar, 16Zaret K.S. Yamamoto K.R. Cell. 1984; 38: 29-38Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (286) Google Scholar). This is accompanied by simultaneous occupancy of all thecis-acting elements on the surface of a nucleosome-like particle resulting in functional synergism between the bound factors (8Truss M. Bartsch J. Schelbert A. Haché R.J.G. Beato M. EMBO J. 1995; 14: 1737-1751Crossref PubMed Scopus (265) Google Scholar, 17Chalepakis G. Arnemann J. Slater E. Bruller H.J. Gross B. Beato M. Cell. 1988; 53: 371-382Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (152) Google Scholar, 18Miksicek R. Borgmeyer U. Nowock J. EMBO J. 1987; 6: 1355-1360Crossref PubMed Scopus (98) Google Scholar). However, on either naked DNA or MMTV mononucleosomes, HRs do not cooperate with NF1 for binding to their cognate sites in the promoter (14Piña B. Brüggemeier U. Beato M. Cell. 1990; 60: 719-731Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (335) Google Scholar, 19Brüggemeier U. Rogge L. Winnacker E.L. Beato M. EMBO J. 1990; 9: 2233-2239Crossref PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar). In addition, the two proteins do not synergize in transcription assays with free MMTV DNA as template (20Kalff M. Gross B. Beato M. Nature. 1990; 344: 360-362Crossref PubMed Scopus (51) Google Scholar). As nucleosome depletion eliminates the synergism between receptors and NF1, we have suggested that chromatin is required for synergism and, thus, for efficient activation of the promoter (21Chávez S. Beato M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1997; 94: 2885-2890Crossref PubMed Scopus (70) Google Scholar). Using MMTV minichromosomes assembled in Drosophila embryo extracts we have shown that chromatin is required for the synergistic binding of progesterone receptor B (PRB) and NF1 in a two-step process. First, PRB binds to the accessible HREs and recruits an ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling activity, which transiently opens the chromatin and permits access of NF1 to the promoter. In turn, bound NF1 facilitates the binding of additional PR molecules (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar). To further understand the mechanism of activation of the MMTV promoter, we have analyzed the contribution of the PRD of NF1 to the synergism with the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) on the MMTV promoter inSaccharomyces cerevisiae. We have chosen budding yeast because the MMTV promoter behaves in yeast essentially as in mammalian cells, provided the relevant transcription factors are artificially expressed (23Chávez S. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 6987-6998Crossref PubMed Scopus (41) Google Scholar). Moreover, contrary to metazoan cells that are rich in NF1, yeast offers the possibility to manipulate the levels of various NF1 isoforms in the absence of an endogenous homologue. Here we show that DNA binding of NF1 is required for stable hormone-dependent chromatin remodeling over the MMTV promoter. In titration experiments we show that the activity of the MMTV promoter is limited by the amount of ligand-activated GR and not by the levels of NF1. The DNA binding domain of NF1, which is devoid of significant transactivation activity, synergizes with GR in transactivation and chromatin remodeling. Similar results are obtained with MMTV minichromosomes assembled in extracts fromDrosophila embryos and transcribed in the presence of PRB and either full-length NF1 or the NF1-DBD. In contrast, on a mutant MMTV promoter displaying an open chromatin conformation the synergism between NF1 and GR depends on the transactivation domain of NF1. Thus, the mechanism of synergistic transactivation by hormone receptors and NF1 differs depending on the chromatin organization of the MMTV promoter. The yeast strain used in this study was YPH499 (a ade2-101 his3-Δ200 leu2-Δ1 trp1-Δ1 ura3-52 lys2-801) (24Sikorski R.S. Hieter P. Genetics. 1989; 122: 19-27Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). Growth and manipulation were according to standard procedures (25Adams R. Gottschling D. Stearn T. Methods in Yeast Genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY1997Google Scholar). All plasmids were constructed usingEscherichia coli strain DH5α. pLGZMMTV (23Chávez S. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 6987-6998Crossref PubMed Scopus (41) Google Scholar), pSCh105 (26Candau R. Chávez S. Beato M. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1996; 57: 19-31Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar), and pHRE/MMTVΔ are YEp plasmids based on the URA3 gene containing the MMTV-lacZ, MMTVΔ-lacZ, and HRE/MMTVΔ-lacZ fusion constructs, respectively. pHRE/MMTVΔ was constructed by replacing theSalI-XhoI fragment from pLGZMMTV, containing the MMTV promoter, with a SalI-XhoI fragment containing a consensus HRE immediately upstream of the NF1 site of the MMTVΔ promoter. p314N795 is a YCp expression plasmid for rat GR (27Yoshinaga S.K. Peterson C.L. Herskowitz I. Yamamoto K.R. Science. 1992; 258: 1598-1604Crossref PubMed Scopus (414) Google Scholar). pAA-CTF1 is a YEp expression vectors for pig NF1-C1 derived from pAAH5 (28Altmann H. Wendler W. Winnacker E.L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1994; 91: 3901-3905Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar). pAA-CTF (1Peterson C.L. Tamkun J.W. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1995; 20: 143-146Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (343) Google Scholar, 2Cairns B.R. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1998; 23: 20-25Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (152) Google Scholar, 3Kadonaga J.T. Cell. 1998; 92: 307-313Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (471) Google Scholar, 4Imhof A. Wolffe A.P. Curr. Biol. 1998; 8: R422-R424Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 5Grunstein M. Nature. 1997; 389: 349-352Crossref PubMed Scopus (2419) Google Scholar, 6Beato M. Truss M. Chavez S. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1996; 784: 93-123Crossref PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar) is a YEp expression vector for pig NF1-C319, constructed by cloning a PCR fragment containing exons 1–6 at theHindIII site of pAAH5. p415MCTF1 and p415MCTFbd are YCp expression plasmids for pig NF1-C1 and NF1-C229. p415MCTF1 consists of a SspI-XbaI (made blunt end) NF1-C1 fragment inserted at SmaI of p415MET25 (29Mumberg D. Muller R. Funk M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994; 22: 5767-5768Crossref PubMed Scopus (803) Google Scholar). p415MCTFbd consists in aBamHI-HindIII NF1-C229 fragment inserted atBamHI-HindIII of p415MET25. ptCTF2 and ptCTFbd are YEp expresion vectors for tagged (His-tag and hemagglutinin-tag) NF1-C2 and NF1-C229. NF1 open reading frames were PCR-amplified, cut with HindIII, and inserted at the HindIII site of pAAH5. Transcription activity was determined by β-galactosidase assay of permeabilized cells (30Guarente L. Methods Enzymol. 1983; 101: 181-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (874) Google Scholar). Yeast cells were grown overnight in the appropriate selective medium at 30 °C, diluted to A 660: 0.1 and incubated with hormone (deacylcortivazol, DAC) or vehicle for an additional 8 h. Cells were then harvested and assayed for activity, given in β-galactosidase units. The minichromosomes assembly and the cell-free transcription reactions were performed as described previously (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar). For the preparation of the DNA probe the oligonucleotides 5′-cctttggcactgtgccaaag-3′ and 5′-ctttggcacagtgccaaagg-3′ were annealed, gel-purified, and end-labeled by T4 polynucleotide kinase and [γ-32P]ATP. All binding reactions contained 5 μg of yeast protein extract prepared as described previously (31McNabb D.S. Xing Y. Guarente L. Genes Dev. 1995; 9: 47-58Crossref PubMed Scopus (234) Google Scholar), 12 mm HEPES-NaOH (pH 7.9), 210 mm KCl, 4 mm Tris-HCl (pH 7.9), 1 mm EDTA, 12% glycerol, 4.2 mm β-mercaptoethanol, 3 μg of poly(dI-dC), 3 μg of denatured salmon sperm DNA, and 0.5–1 ng of the labeled probe in a final volume of 20 μl. Reactions were incubated at 30 °C for 45 min. The protein-DNA complexes were resolved by electrophoresis (4 h at 200 V) on 5% polyacrylamide-10% glycerol gels (acrylamide to bisacrylamide weight ratio of 37.5:1) in 0.5× TBE at 4 °C. Quantification of DNA complexes was performed by a PhosphorImager. Mapping of DHS was performed by indirect end labeling as described previously (23Chávez S. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 6987-6998Crossref PubMed Scopus (41) Google Scholar). Briefly, transformants were grown in appropriate selective medium to mid-log phase and incubated with 1 μm DAC or vehicle for 60 min. Cells were then harvested, and spheroplasts were prepared and treated with different amounts of DNase I. After DNA extraction, DNase I-cleaved genomic DNA samples were restricted with ClaI, resolved in a 1.5% agarose gels, blotted onto Qiabrane nylon-plus membrane, and probed with a 200-bp PCR fragment corresponding to the sequence of thelacZ gene situated immediately upstream of theClaI site. Plasmid DNA cleaved by ClaI andSacI (position −108) or DraI (−198) served as an internal size marker. The restriction enzyme assays were performed essentially as described previously (32Venditti P., Di Croce L. Kauer M. Blank T. Becker P.B. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998; 26: 3657-3666Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar) with the following modifications: 50 units of HinfI were used instead of 200 units, and the second restriction cleavage for the HRE/MMTVΔ template was performed with PvuII. The accessibility of the NF1 binding site on the MMTV promoter in yeast is limited by the presence of a positioned nucleosome, which is also required for the synergism between GR and NF1 (21Chávez S. Beato M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1997; 94: 2885-2890Crossref PubMed Scopus (70) Google Scholar). Removal of the region containing the HREs, as in MMTVΔ (Fig.1 A), makes the NF1 binding site more accessible by destabilizing the positioned nucleosome (26Candau R. Chávez S. Beato M. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1996; 57: 19-31Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar). We used this truncated MMTVΔ promoter to test whether the transcriptional response depends on the levels of NF1 in the cell. Toward this end we expressed NF1-C1 (Fig. 1 B) under the control of the MET25 promoter that is regulated by the levels of methionine. This yielded levels of active NF1-C1 that varied by a factor of 15, as determined by GEMSA (Fig.2 C). As expected, transactivation increased linearly with the level of NF1-C1 (Fig.2 A), demonstrating that the PRD is active in yeast and that, within the concentration range tested, there is no other limiting factor. A similar behavior was observed with the wild type MMTV promoter in the absence of ligand, although the absolute values were 10-fold lower and there was no detectable activation at low concentrations of NF1 (Fig. 2 B, squares,right ordinate). However, when the wild type MMTV promoter was assayed in the presence of 100 nm of the agonistic ligand DAC, the activity increased to high levels already at the lowest concentration of NF1 and did not increase further at higher NF1 concentrations (Fig. 2 B, circles, left ordinate). The synergism between GR and NF1 was around 6-fold even at concentrations of NF1 that were insufficient for significant activation of the truncated MMTVΔ or the wild type MMTV promoter in the absence of hormone (Fig. 2 D). These data suggest that GR-mediated chromatin remodeling facilitates entry of NF1 and that the affinity of NF1 for the remodeled wild type MMTV chromatin is high compared with its affinity for the nonremodeled wild type MMTV chromatin or the MMTVΔ chromatin.Figure 2Effect of NF1-C1 concentration on the MMTV promoter activity. A, activity of the MMTVΔ promoter, expressed as β-galactosidase activity of transformants containing the MMTVΔ reporter and either p415MET25 (0) or p415MCTF1 (NF1-C1) and grown at various concentrations of methionine. The activity is expressed as function of the relative DNA binding calculated by GEMSA (see C). Note the logarithmic scale. B, activity of the wild type MMTV promoter in the absence of DAC (squares and right ordinate) or in the presence of 100 nm (circles and left ordinate) or 25 nm DAC (triangles andleft ordinate). β-Galactosidase activity was assayed on transformants containing the wild type MMTV reporter, the GR expression vector p314N795, and p415MET25 (0) or p415MCTF1 (NF1-C1) and grown at various concentrations of methionine. Values are represented as in A. The average and S.D. of two independent experiments each performed with two independent transformants is shown.C, relative DNA binding as determined by GEMSA with a NF1 oligonucleotide and protein extracts from transformants containing either p415MET25 (dash) or p415MCTF1 (NF1-C1). Expression levels of NF1-C1 were increased by growing the cells in decreasing concentrations of methionine, 1, 0.5, 0.25, 0.1 mm or in the absence of methionine. The DNA binding activity is expressed relative to that found in cells grown in the presence of 1 mm methionine (lane 2).D, synergism between GR and increasing amounts of NF1-C1 at 100 and 25 nm DAC, calculated from experiment B as described (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar).View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload (PPT) At lower concentrations of DAC (25 nm), the level of activity decreased around 8-fold. The synergism with GR was also lower but independent of the NF1 concentration (Fig. 2 B,triangles, left ordinate, and Fig. 2 D,shadowed bars). At higher concentrations of DAC, in the micromolar range, GR alone was already able to activate the MMTV promoter rather efficiently, and the synergism with NF1 was markedly reduced or even insignificant (data not shown). Collectively, our data confirm that the levels of activated GR are the main determinant of the degree of activation of the promoter and that NF1 helps GR only when the activated receptor is present at suboptimal concentrations (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar). NF1 is present in metazoan cells in several variants that all share the N-terminal DNA binding and dimerization domains, whereas their C-terminal half harbors a variable PRD capable of enhancing transcription in yeast, Drosophila, and HeLa cells (12Kim T.K. Roeder R.G. J. Biol. Chem. 1993; 268: 20866-20869Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 13Mermod N. O'Neill E.A. Kelly T.J. Tjian R. Cell. 1989; 58: 741-753Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (542) Google Scholar, 33Knox J.J. Rebstein P.J. Manoukian A. Gronostajski R.M. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1991; 11: 2946-2951Crossref PubMed Scopus (11) Google Scholar). To directly test the role of the PRD in the synergism with GR on the MMTV promoter, we deleted the whole proline-rich region of NF1 (C319, Fig. 1 B). This deletion did not affect the amount of DNA-binding protein, as determined by GEMSA (data not shown). As expected, the deletion mutant showed an insignificant activation of the truncated MMTVΔ, compared with the 12-fold activation displayed by the wild type NF1-C1 (Fig.3 A). In contrast, the NF1-C319 mutant exhibited similar synergism with the activated GR as the wild type NF1-C1 protein (Fig. 3 B). We have observed a similar synergism with two additional NF1-C variants (C2 and C7) previously shown to transactivate differently in yeast (28Altmann H. Wendler W. Winnacker E.L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1994; 91: 3901-3905Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar) (data not shown). These results strongly suggest that NF1 transactivation is dispensable for synergism with GR. In addition, because the absolute values were very similar for all NF variants and mutants (Fig. 3 B and data not shown), one must assume that the PRD of NF1 is not operative in the context of the GR-activated MMTV chromatin. The DNA sequence spanning the five HREs plays a critical role in the maintenance of well organized chromatin structure over the MMTV promoter, as deduced from the increase in NF1 activity and nuclease accessibility observed in the MMTVΔ promoter (Refs. 21Chávez S. Beato M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1997; 94: 2885-2890Crossref PubMed Scopus (70) Google Scholar and 26Candau R. Chávez S. Beato M. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1996; 57: 19-31Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar and Fig. 2). To study the synergism between GR and NF1 in the absence of a regular chromatin organization we cloned a 15-bp consensus HRE just upstream of the NF1 site in the MMTVΔ promoter (Fig. 1 A, HRE/MMTVΔ). The activity of NF1 is the same in both MMTVΔ and HRE/MMTVΔ (compare NF1 activities in Fig. 3, A and C, without hormone), suggesting that the NF1 site remains accessible after addition of the single HRE (see below). In the HRE/MMTVΔ promoter, the PRD of NF1 is active in the presence of activated GR, as shown by the decrease in activity caused by its deletion (Fig. 3,NF1-C319). Moreover, in this mutant MMTV promoter there is 4.8-fold synergism between activated GR and NF1, and this synergism requires the PRD of NF1 (Fig. 3 C, 100 nm DAC). Thus, the lack of function of the PRD of NF1 in terms of synergism with GR on the wild type MMTV promoter does not reflect an inherent property of the protein or the lack of necessary co-activators, but must be due to the organization of the promoter. The N-terminal portion of NF1-C (exons 1–4) is sufficient for site-specific DNA recognition and protein dimerization (13Mermod N. O'Neill E.A. Kelly T.J. Tjian R. Cell. 1989; 58: 741-753Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (542) Google Scholar, 34Meisterernst M. Rogge L. Foeckler R. Karaghiosoff M. Winnacker E.L. Biochemistry. 1989; 28: 8191-8200Crossref PubMed Scopus (72) Google Scholar). The PRD-deficient mutant NF1-C319 contains two additional exons coding for a protein sequence that has been claimed to be involved in NF1 transactivation (28Altmann H. Wendler W. Winnacker E.L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1994; 91: 3901-3905Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar). 2F. Prado, R. Koop, and M. Beato, unpublished data. We wondered whether just the DBD of NF1 (C229, Fig.1 B) would be sufficient for the synergism with GR on the MMTV promoter. To test this idea we expressed NF1-C229 using the methionine regulated vector. As shown in Fig.4 A, NF1-C229 does not activate the MMTV promoter in the absence of hormone. Most importantly, NF1-C229 is able to synergize rather efficiently with GR (Fig. 4, Aand B). Collectively, our results are compatible with the notion that DNA binding of NF1 to its target site on the MMTV promoter is sufficient for synergism with activated GR in a well organized chromatin context. In mammalian cells, glucocorticoid induction of the MMTV promoter is known to generate a DHS over the region containing the HREs (8Truss M. Bartsch J. Schelbert A. Haché R.J.G. Beato M. EMBO J. 1995; 14: 1737-1751Crossref PubMed Scopus (265) Google Scholar, 16Zaret K.S. Yamamoto K.R. Cell. 1984; 38: 29-38Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (286) Google Scholar, 35Richard-Foy H. Hager G.L. EMBO J. 1987; 6: 2321-2328Crossref PubMed Scopus (450) Google Scholar), but the role of NF1 in this process could not be tested due to its ubiquitous expression. To explore whether remodeling of MMTV chromatin can be achieved by activated GR alone or whether NF1 is necessary, we performed in vivo DHS assays in yeast. In the absence of NF1, ligand-activated GR did not generate a DHS over the MMTV promoter (Fig. 5, compare lanes 4 and5 with lanes 7 and 8). In agreement with the functional data, however, we found a hormone-induced DHS in MMTV chromatin of yeast cells expressing NF1-C2 and GR (Fig. 5, comparelanes 10 and 11 with lanes 13 and14). Therefore, NF1 is required for efficient remodeling of MMTV chromatin following hormone induction. A similar hormone-dependent change in chromatin structure was observed in cells expressing GR and NF1-C229 (Fig. 5, comparelanes 16 and 17 with lanes 19 and20). Thus, the DBD of NF1 can fulfill the same function as the natural NF1 variants in terms of cooperating with ligand-activated GR to generate a remodeled chromatin structure over the nucleosome B of the MMTV promoter. To test whether the specific requirement for synergism between NF1 and GR was also found with another receptor and under different conditions, we used the same wild type and mutant MMTV promoters along with recombinant human PRB and NF1 for transcription experimentsin vitro. To this end the corresponding templates were assembled into minichromosomes in extracts from Drosophilaembryos and transcribed in a HeLa cell nuclear extract (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar). As reported previously, the wild type MMTV promoter is organized into positioned nucleosomes (32Venditti P., Di Croce L. Kauer M. Blank T. Becker P.B. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998; 26: 3657-3666Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar) and virtually repressed in these minichromosomes (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar) (Fig. 6 A,lane 1). Incubation with either PRB (lane 2) or NF1 (lane 3) resulted in very little transcription, whereas incubation with both proteins together led to very robust transcription (lane 5). In this particular experiment the synergism between PRB and NF1 was 13-fold. Recombinant NF1-DBD alone was unable to activate transcription on its own (lane 4), but in conjunction with PRBresulted in a similar transcriptional synergism as observed the intact NF1 protein (lane 6). On minichromosomes containing the HRE/MMTVΔ promoter, the core promoter was more accessible to the basal transcriptional machinery than on wild type MMTV minichromosomes (compare lanes 1 and7). PRB alone was able to activate transcription to a higher extent (compares lane 2 and 7 withlane 8), and NF1 also produced a slight increase in transcription (compare lanes 7 and 9). The two proteins did synergize on the HRE/MMTVΔ minichromosomes, although to a lesser extent than on wild type minichromosomes (synergism, 5-fold). The NF1-DBD was transcriptional inert on the HRE/MMTVΔ minichromosomes (compare lanes 7 and 10) and was also unable to synergize with PRB on these minichromosomes (compare lanes 8 and 12). Therefore, as with GR in yeast, the requirement for the PRD of NF1 is promoter-specific and correlates with the organization of the promoter in chromatin. The accessibility for PRB of the HRE/MMTVΔ minichromosomes already indicates an open chromatin conformation. To test this notion in a more direct way we measured the cleavage efficiency at a HinfI restriction site, which overlaps with the NF1 binding site and is located within the confines of nucleosome B (32Venditti P., Di Croce L. Kauer M. Blank T. Becker P.B. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998; 26: 3657-3666Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar). With wild type MMTV minichromosomes less than 2% of the templates were cleaved within 2 min (Fig. 6 B, lane 3), suggesting a tight chromatin structure. In contrast, with HRE/MMTVΔ minichromosomes over 30% of the templates were cleaved during the same period of time (lane 4), indicating a more relaxed chromatin organization. The kinetics of cleavage of the two templates over a period of 20 min shows that this difference is stable over time and thus likely reflects a difference in the starting chromatin organization of the templates (Fig. 6 B,inset). The MMTV promoter is activated by glucocorticoids or progestins in a process that involves a synergistic interaction between GR or PR and NF1. Based on titration experiments with wild type and mutant proteins in yeast, we have shown here that NF1 does not act like a conventional transcription factor in the context of the activated MMTV promoter. The PRD of NF1 is neither operative nor needed for synergism with GR in yeast. Following hormone induction and GR binding to the exposed HREs, binding of NF1 to its cognate site on the MMTV promoter is promoted, required, and sufficient for full activation of the GR-triggered promoter. Hence, there is a functional synergism between GR and the DBD of NF1. Similarly, on MMTV minichromosomes transcribed in vitro, PR synergizes with NF1 or its DBD, while the transactivation domain is not required. This novel kind of synergism depends on the proper organization of the promoter in chromatin, which is mediated by the region containing the natural array of five HREs. Replacing the natural HREs by a single canonical HRE disturbs the chromatin organization and makes the synergism with GR or PR dependent on the PRD of NF1. Therefore, the lack of function of the PRD in the context of the MMTV promoter is not due to the inability of this domain to synergize with GR in vitro or in yeast, nor to the absence of relevant co-activators in this organism. In mammalian cells, hormone-dependent activation of the MMTV promoter is accompanied by the appearance of a DHS over the nucleosome B, which has been interpreted as the consequence of nucleosome disruption (16Zaret K.S. Yamamoto K.R. Cell. 1984; 38: 29-38Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (286) Google Scholar, 35Richard-Foy H. Hager G.L. EMBO J. 1987; 6: 2321-2328Crossref PubMed Scopus (450) Google Scholar). Following glucocorticoid induction of cells carrying chromosomally integrated copies of the MMTV promoter, we find an increase in nuclease sensitivity in the vicinity of the pseudodyad axis of nucleosome B and a concomitant occupation of all the HREs and the NF1 site, as judged by genomic footprinting (8Truss M. Bartsch J. Schelbert A. Haché R.J.G. Beato M. EMBO J. 1995; 14: 1737-1751Crossref PubMed Scopus (265) Google Scholar). We interpreted these findings as indicative of an open nucleosome B conformation induced by GR binding and compatible with simultaneous binding of all transcription factors to the promoter. At that time we could not decide whether the activated receptor alone was able to induce this conformational change or whether NF1 was also needed. Our results in yeast now show that GR alone is not sufficient to induce a stable structural modification of chromatin. Rather NF1 is required for the generation of a DHS over nucleosome B. More importantly, the DBD of NF1 is sufficient for this effect. This suggests that the main function of NF1 in the context of the activated MMTV promoter is to bind to DNA and to stabilize an “open” chromatin conformation. The stabilizing effect may arise from the high affinity of NF1 for its target site on free DNA in combination with its inability to bind to this site on positioned nucleosomes containing a full complement of core histones (11Eisfeld K. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25: 3733-3742Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar, 14Piña B. Brüggemeier U. Beato M. Cell. 1990; 60: 719-731Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (335) Google Scholar). The nature of the open chromatin conformation stabilized by NF1 binding remains obscure, but it may include a total or partial dissociation of histone H2A/H2B dimers, as NF1 binds efficiently to MMTV promoter sequences positioned on a tetramer of histones H3 and H4 (36Spangenberg C. Eisfeld K. Stunkel W. Luger K. Flaus A. Richmonds T.J. Truss M. Beato M. J. Mol. Biol. 1998; 278: 725-739Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar). Therefore, NF1 amplifies the transcriptional response of the MMTV promoter at low concentration of activated GR in vivo, likely by the same mechanism by which it reduces the amount of PR needed for full occupancy of the HREs in vitro (22Di Croce L. Koop R. Venditti P. Westphal H.M. Nightingale K.P. Corona D.F. Becker P.B. Beato M. Mol. Cell. 1999; 4: 45-54Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar). As shown in our titration experiments, this auxillary role is accomplished with high efficiency, since very low amounts of NF1 are required to reach maximal activity. This mechanism of activation depends of the accurate chromatin organization of the MMTV promoter. Whereas, in response to the ligand the receptors can bind to well organized chromatin and thus initiate the activation of the promoter, NF1 is unable to trigger this process, because it cannot access its target site within positioned nucleosomes (11Eisfeld K. Candau R. Truss M. Beato M. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997; 25: 3733-3742Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar, 14Piña B. Brüggemeier U. Beato M. Cell. 1990; 60: 719-731Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (335) Google Scholar). Therefore, NF1 can only act on promoters that have been fired by activated receptors. It cooperates with the receptors by maintaining an open chromatin structure, which is required for the entry of additional receptor molecules. The DBD of NF1 is sufficient for this structural role, which probably can only take place when the HREs and the NF1 binding sites are located within the same positioned nucleosome. Triggering by the receptors must be the rate-limiting step in the promoter activation cascade, as suggested by our observation that the levels of activated GR determines the absolute induction values. That this kind of synergism depends on correctly positioned nucleosomes is suggested by the results obtained when nucleosome positioning is disturbed, as in the case of the HRE/MMTVΔ promoter. This alteration in chromatin structure makes the NF1 site more accessible and enables NF1 to contribute to the activation of promoters via its own transactivation domain. In this situation, however, the DBD of NF1 alone is not sufficient. Although confirmation in animal cells is necessary, our results in yeast show that the precise chromatin organization over the regulatory region of MMTV allows a fine-tuning of the proviral promoter by providing a platform for factor cooperation. Two models have been proposed to explain the activation of promoters by various inducing agents, the gradual model and the binary model. The gradual model assumes the existence of multiple states of promoter activity, depending on the dose of the inducing agent and on the strength and combinations of transactivators. The stochastic binary model proposes that there are only two possible states of any promoter, “on” and “off,” and that the strength of a particular promoter is an intrinsic property of its core elements (37Walters M.C. Fiering S. Eidemiller J. Magis W. Groudine M. Martin D.I.K. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1995; 92: 7125-7129Crossref PubMed Scopus (242) Google Scholar, 38Weintraub H. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1988; 85: 5819-5823Crossref PubMed Scopus (86) Google Scholar). In this model, the increase in transcription levels found with increasing amounts of activators is attributed to the recruitment of an increasing proportion of promoters from the off into the on state. The binary model has been shown to apply to the hormonal induction of the MMTV promoter in mammalian cells (39Ko M.S.H. Nakauchi H. Takahashi N. EMBO J. 1990; 9: 2835-2842Crossref PubMed Scopus (165) Google Scholar) and may explain why the PRD of NF1 is not operative in the context of the wild type MMTV promoter. It has been reported that a graded response can be converted into an all-or-none binary response by either a competition of transactivators and transrepressors for the same DNA regulatory element (40Rossi F.M. Kringstein A.M. Spicher A. Guicherit O.M. Blau H.M. Mol. Cell. 2000; 6: 723-728Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar) or the introduction of a positive feedback loop (41Becskei A. Seraphin B. Serrano L. EMBO J. 2001; 20: 2528-2535Crossref PubMed Scopus (560) Google Scholar). Our results are compatible with the participation of both mechanisms in the activation of the MMTV promoter. On the one side, a positioned nucleosome acts as a repressor that competes with binding of the transactivator NF1. On the other, receptor-mediated NF1 binding acts a positive feedback loop for binding of additional hormone receptors molecules. Along this line, we predict that the HRE/MMTVΔ will behave in a more graded fashion. Although our mechanistic view of the induction process remains purely hypothetical, it provides a theoretical frame for exploring how the same two transcription factors acting on the same core promoter synergize by two different mechanisms depending on the DNA sequence information context. We thank W. Wendler and E.-L. Winnacker (Munich, Germany), as well as P. van der Vliet (Utrecht, Holland) for various NF1 constructs." @default.
• W2149270669 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2149270669 creator A5029031372 @default.
• W2149270669 creator A5029586324 @default.
• W2149270669 creator A5059263283 @default.
• W2149270669 date "2002-02-01" @default.
• W2149270669 modified "2023-09-30" @default.
• W2149270669 title "Accurate Chromatin Organization of the Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus Promoter Determines the Nature of the Synergism between Transcription Factors" @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1493507586 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1504034854 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1511815964 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1566478858 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1627947508 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1826522511 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1942467333 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1964106638 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1965600291 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W1998280478 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2000456081 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2000859632 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2002854177 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2013812530 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2016546231 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2016729009 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2017573875 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2023230576 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2025184509 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2026938521 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2027294913 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2030211226 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2033325031 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2036781609 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2037802059 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2050458992 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2054188881 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W205934865 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2060642441 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2068394666 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2078038295 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2081495213 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2085206941 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2090610011 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2094485555 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2112921502 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2169333620 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W2170753025 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W4250682987 @default.
• W2149270669 cites W8014543 @default.
• W2149270669 doi "https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m110094200" @default.
• W2149270669 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11733499" @default.
• W2149270669 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2149270669 type Work @default.
• W2149270669 sameAs 2149270669 @default.
• W2149270669 citedByCount "11" @default.
• W2149270669 countsByYear W21492706692016 @default.
• W2149270669 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2149270669 hasAuthorship W2149270669A5029031372 @default.
• W2149270669 hasAuthorship W2149270669A5029586324 @default.
• W2149270669 hasAuthorship W2149270669A5059263283 @default.
• W2149270669 hasBestOaLocation W21492706691 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C101762097 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C150194340 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C179926584 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C2522874641 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C2779777497 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C502942594 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C552990157 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C83640560 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C86339819 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConcept C95444343 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C101762097 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C104317684 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C138885662 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C150194340 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C179926584 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C2522874641 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C2779777497 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C41895202 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C502942594 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C54355233 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C552990157 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C83640560 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C86339819 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C86803240 @default.
• W2149270669 hasConceptScore W2149270669C95444343 @default.
• W2149270669 hasIssue "7" @default.
• W2149270669 hasLocation W21492706691 @default.
• W2149270669 hasOpenAccess W2149270669 @default.
• W2149270669 hasPrimaryLocation W21492706691 @default.
• W2149270669 hasRelatedWork W1986245191 @default.
• W2149270669 hasRelatedWork W2013304283 @default.
• W2149270669 hasRelatedWork W2060511970 @default.
• W2149270669 hasRelatedWork W2070159701 @default.

• next